Dublin is the ‘second-slowest city centre in the world’ for drivers

It's not going to be faster if it takes 25-50 years to agree, design and build the underground or monorail

We have buses today, and we need to give them priority. It's just crazy to have 30-70 people on a bus stuck waiting for a couple of dopes in a couple of 80% empty SUVs.

yeah its not a surprise, a european capital, two booms later, dublin gdp is outrageous AND no transport system... It is truly unbelievable! other similar sized european cities like copenhagen etc, have several meto lines along with good comprehensive tram systems and heavy rail...

also as to cycling, yeah brilliant sustainable form of transport HOWEVER its too dangerous with the other morons on the road here, simply too dangerous. I do some calculated risk stuff as part of my job, at heights. The difference is, I am in control. On the road? who gives a **** if you are the worlds best and more aware cyclist? that going to save you when some idiot plows into you?

I dont disagree with you, but I cannot see a situation whereby bus routes are completley given over to buses and cars are segregated completely from the bus roads.

1. Why just light rail? Luas is too slow and low capacity for the job it's already being asked to do, expanding the existing lines just makes services worse. Dublin absolutely needs a metro, and it's not just for serving the airport either.
2. Free? We could brand it "Junkiebus". What's the point of just getting people up and down the quays though? Heuston aside, the main trip generators on the quays are all very close together and there's already loads of buses going up and down the quays anyway. Under BusConnects all the spines will interchange on or near O'Connell St.

Our taxes go to bailing out banks and ensuring freeloaders have an easy life. Don't expect things like a decent healthcare system or, God forbid, something like a train going to an airport.

Google maps takes into account the current traffic when estimating your journey time.

From my home to a landmark pub in the south of the city..9.1 kilometres away.

Leaving now…

31 minutes by car

56 minutes by public transport. Including my walk to the stop and allowing me to be there 4 minutes before the ‘scheduled’ arrival of that bus.

31 minutes vs 56 minutes… or return… 1 hour 2 mins vs 1 hour 52 minutes

25 minute difference for a 9.1 kilometre journey one way and 50 return…

that’s why a lot of people prefer sitting in traffic in the comfort of their own vehicle as opposed to spending almost an hour between standing in the cold waiting and getting on a packed overcrowded bus that goes around the world like ours does before it even gets out of the area towards its destination …look now too, off peak many routes are crowded, standing room only, population is exploding… so anyone lecturing citizens that they should get out of cars and into public transport needs a lie down and some vitamin tablets. Until we have adequate effective, efficient, reliable and express public transportation, people are going to choose to use private vehicles….

unless im going shopping in the city centre, all of my other regular destinations, I can’t get to them using public transport without engaging in obscene levels of inconvenience.

get vehicles off the roads ? Sure, metro ? More Luas ? Nope, they get kicked down the road and it’s fûck the citizen and taxpayer again.

I don't disagree with your general principle, that current driver behaviours and traffic conditions are a real barrier to getting more people cycling.

But the general idea that cycling is hugely dangerous doesn't really stand up. The health benefits are huge, including halving cancer rates, and vastly outweigh the risk of injury.

As far as I recall, a fair percentage of cycling road deaths are on those country roads.

So again, people are generally bad at assessing actual risk.